E-mail Comment Twitter Facebook Del.icio.us Digg Technorati

Refusal to Disarm

Sep 23, 2006 Brainwaves, In The News

Sounds good to me:

Hezbollah spokesman Hussein Rahhal said Nasrallah would deliver a “landmark historic speech” addressing international calls for his group’s disarmament and the deployment of U.N. peacekeepers in south Lebanon, which for years has been controlled by the militant group.

The U.N.-brokered cease-fire that ended fighting between the guerrillas and Israel on Aug. 14 calls for stripping Hezbollah of its weapons, but Nasrallah has been defiant.

As I recall, one of the requirements of the cease-fire was the disarmament of Hezbollah, and they’re refusing to comply. I don’t see a problem, then, with the restart of the Israeli offensive against the terrorist organization. Hezbollah is failing to adhere to the agreement, so Israel should have no obligation to honor it.

Then again, neither Lebanon nor the UN wanted to take responsibility for disarming them anyway, so it was only half an agreement to begin with.

This entry was posted on Saturday, September 23rd, 2006 at 5:06 PM and is filed under Brainwaves, In The News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
  • Here here. The impression I got from reading what happened at the end of the previous conflict was that the Israeli prime minister blinked first. The Israeli military was ready and willing to keep going, but Olmert balked under international pressure.

    Meanwhile, as Israel reloads, Hezbollah's stockpiling rockets, too. From the same article:

    Hezbollah is armed with thousands of rockets and Nasrallah has said his arsenal survived the Israeli onslaught. He boasted in a TV interview last week that the guerrillas — and their weapons — were still at the Israeli border in south Lebanon.


    I'm all behind Israel on this one, 'cause I believe they've got the moral upper hand.
  • No problem at all.
    But Israel will wait for the opportune time and location, when it is prepared correctly the next time, both offensively and defensively. You see, they've seen it all before, with Gaza in the 1950's, Jordan in the 1970's, the PLO in Lebanon in the 1970's and 1980's. Nothing really new here, just some updated weapons, they can be countered easily, although not inexpensively.

    See, the next time, if Israel chooses, the outcome will be far different.
blog comments powered by Disqus